1 BRIEF BANK WASHOE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY S OFFICE PREDICATES Note: Use the navigation button at the top of your screen to get back to the home page. Notes on Predicates for Trial Evidence and Demonstrations Handling Exhibits Automobile Accident Reconstruction Autopsy Questions Pathologist Bank Account Microfilm Records Blood Alcohol Toxicologist Blood Groupings chemist Body Fluids Expert Blood Semen Breathalyzer DUI Burglary Tools Expert Business Records Chemist Narcotics Child Witness Qualifying Chemist Blood Groupings Clerk of the Court Comparison Expert Evidence Hair Soil Fibers Glass Confession Admissibility Counterfeit Currency Expert Court Reporter Qualifications Crime Scene Diagram Defendant ID Out-of-Court Police Officer Defendant ID Out-of-Court Witness Defendant ID Line-up Police Officer Defendant ID Line-up Witness Doctor Medical Documents Expert Questioned DUI Breathalyzer DUI Police Officer Evidence Comparison Expert
2 Evidence Introduction Finger Print Palm Print Expert Firearms Expert Footprints Expert Hospital Records Hostile Witness Foundation Identification Voice Impeachment Prior Inconsistent Statements Impeachment Prior Inconsistent Unsworn Statements Infant Witness Qualifying Insanity Alleged at Time of the Crime - Psychiatrist Cross Examination Insanity Alleged at Time of the Crime - Lay Witness Cross Examination Line-up ID Police Officer Line-up ID Lay Witness Lotteries Expert Marijuana identification Non-Chemist Medical Doctor Memory Refreshing Present Recollection Past recollection Recorded Narcotics Officer Paraphernalia Narcotics Chemist Neutron Activation Analysis Pathologist Autopsy Questions Pathology Medical Expert Paraphernalia Expert Pen Registers Photographs Admission Photographs Generally Photographs Aerial police or professional photographer Physical Evidence Introduction Physician Deceased Hospital Charts and Records Photographic Copies Secondary Evidence Pictures on Checks Regiscope Police Officer Qualifying Prior Conviction Proof by clerk of the Court Prior Conviction Proof by Police Officer Prior Conviction Proof by Bailiff Prior Inconsistent Statement Impeachment Psychiatrist Cross Examination Alleged Insanity at Time of the Crime Questioned Documents Expert Water marks Typewriters Real Evidence Introduction Reconstruction Automobile Accident Records Bank Account Microfilm Records Business Records Hospital Refreshing Memory Regiscope Pictures on Checks
3 Sanity Competency to Stand Trial Sanity At the time of the Crime Secondary Evidence Photographic Copies Telephone Conversation Recording machine Tire Tracks Expert Tool marks Expert Toxicologist Blood Alcohol Translator Spanish/English Valuation Expert Vehicular Homicide speed, intoxication, injuries, weather, etc. Video Tape Admissibility Voice Identification X-Rays
4 Notes on Predicates for Trial Evidence and Demonstrations Presentation On PREDICATES FOR TRIAL EVIDENCE AND DEMONSTRATIONS Lecture By Steven I. Kroll, Esquire Assistant States Attorney Baltimore County Towson, Maryland I. INTRODUCTION DISCUSSION NOTES AND DETAILED OUTTJT~ A. IN GENERAL 1. Real and demonstrative evidence can breathe life into a case and provide a tangible connection with otherwise intangible facts or events. Any litigator who has used such evidence can attest to the fact that the jury s interest is piqued when the real thing is presented into evidence and when, as an admitted piece of evidence, the jurors are permitted to take it into the jury deliberation room. B. THE REQUIREMENT OF RELEVANCY 1. No matter how interesting or stimulating the evidence might be, however, the prosecutor must still be prepared to show that there is some reason for admitting the evidence. One of the first major hurdles is establishing that the evidence is relevant. NATIONAL COLLEGE OF DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 2. Regardless of whether the evidence is real or demonstrative, the case law has established various legal
5 II. REAL OR ORIGINAL EVIDENCE predicates for authenticating or identifying each type of evidence. The trial court will decide whether the proponent has laid a sufficient predicate or foundation or has sufficiently proved up the evidence. ~ Federal Rule of Evidence 901(a). A. IN GENERAL 1. Evidence which is historically related to the case is often considered to be the direct, real or original evidence. See generally. Cleary, McCormick on Evidence, 212 at 663 (3d ed. 1984). Common examples would include the actual knife used in the assault, the shirt worn by the victim, the piece of broken glass found in the defendant s car, and the drugs seized from the defendant at the time of the arrest. 2. Demonstrative evidence is a generic term usually associated with any tangible evidence which demonstrates a particular fact or condition; it is not essential that the evidence actually be historically connected with the case. For example, a gun similar to the missing weapon used in the robbery might be admissible if it can be established that it is sufficiently similar to the gun actually used. B. READILY IDENTIFIABLE REAL EVIDENCE 1. One common method of identifying real evidence ~s to use a witness who can examine the object and readily identify it in court. The means of identification may be a physical mark placed on the object by the witness,
6 such as a scratch or written initials. Or the witness may recognize the object by pre-existing marks (serial number) or characteristics, i.e. coloring, weight, size, texture, or feel. 2. If the witness cannot readily identify the object, then it may be necessary to either treat the object: as only being similar to the real thing (see discussion below) or establish its authenticity through chain of custody. B. MODELS 1. A prosecutor may find it helpful to construct a model which can be shown to the jury and incorporated into a witness testimony. 2. In establishing the predicate for models, the prosecutor should carefully establish a. the thing or object is such a reasonable exact reproduction or replica of the object involved that when viewed by the jury it causes them to see substantially the same object as the original and, b. there is a good reason for acceptance into evidence of the replica. IV. PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE A. IN GENERAL I hand you State s Exhibit Number 1 for identification. What is it?
7 Do you or do you not recognize it? Does this photograph marked as State s Exhibit Number 1 for identification purposes fairly and accurately depict the subject matter therein on the date and time in question. (Or what is it a picture of 7) Your Honor, the State moves that State s exhibit number 1, for identification be admitted into evidence. B. SILENT V. PICTORIAL 2. There are two generally recognized methods of authenticating a photograph: the silent witness theory and the pictorial testimony theory. See generally Hannewacker v. City of Jacksonville Beach, 419 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1982) (discussion of both theories). X-RAY PREDICATE a. Qualifications of x ray operator as a qualified technician. b. X-ray is of the person s body at a particular time. c. Correct procedures were used d. Proper chain of custody of the cassette between filming and development; e. X-ray film is the one taken of the person E. RELEVANCY OF PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE 1. Assuming that the prosecutor can verify the contents of the photograph,
8 it is still necessary to establish its relevancy. Photographs are usually relevant if they aid the jury in understanding the issue. If they have no tendency to prove or disprove a contested issue in the case they have little use or purpose. ~ State v. Moorman, 744 P.2d 679 (Ariz. 1987). It is important to note, however, that necessity is not the test for determining whether a photo should be admitted. People v. Boggs, 63 Cal. Rptr. 430, 255 Cal.App.2d 693 (1967) 2. The case law recognizes a wide variety of reasons for considering photographic evidence relevant in case. a. Illustrate Testimony. See, e.a., Cash V. State, 784 S.W.2d 166 (Ark. 1990); Gardner V. State, 754 S.W.2d 518 (Ark. 1988). b. Identifies victim: State v. Walker, 537 A.2d 1021 (Conn. 1988); Jackson v. State, 745 S.W.2d4(Tex. Crim. Ap. 1988). c. Shows Degree of Force, Level of Crime. ~ Randolph V. State, 562 So.2d 331 (Fla. 1990) (showed violent and extensive nature of victim s injuries); State v. Micheliche, 533 A.2d 41 (N.J. 1987) (voracity of attack). G. ALIVE PICTURES OF MURDER VICTIMS 1. Where a homicide victim s identity is in issue, a photograph of victim while still alive is probably admissible. See, e.g., Palmer v. State, 451 So.2d 500 (Fla. 1984) (photograph admissible; court noted, however, that the photo might have been cumulative
9 because father had identified victim at morgue). V. AUDIOTAPE EVIDENCE A. IN GENERAL 2. If the victim s identity is not in issue, the photograph is probably inadmissible unless the prosecution can show some other relevant purpose for introducing it. See, e.q~., Staggs v. State, 804 P.2d 456 (Okl. Crim. App. 1991). 1. Audiotape evidence can be extremely effective in showing the jury what was said at the time in question. A tape recorded conversation, for example, of the defendant s participation in a drug sale or in a post crime attempt to cover up a crime, can be particularly devastating. 2. Although there is apparently little case law on the subject, it might be helpful to have a transcript made of the tape, especially if it is hard to follow, and ask that the jury be permitted to follow along on the transcript. It would, of course, be necessary to first lay the foundation for the transcript to insure that it is accurate. B. THE LEGAL PREDICATE FOR AUDIO TAPE 1. In laying the foundation for audio tapes, the prosecutor must be prepared to establish that the tapes are reliable accounts of what was said. 2. The seven step predicate often relied upon was set out in Edwards v.
10 State, 551 S.W.2d 731 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977) which in turn relied upon a widely cited annotation at 58 A.L.R.2d 1024: a. Show that the recording device was capable of recording; b. Show that the operator of the device was competent; 2. The process of verifying the authenticity of a video tape essentially requires the proponent to show that it was produced by a reliable machine and that it has not been altered. See, e.g., Federal Rule of Evidence 901(9) which addresses authentication of a process or system. B. THE LEGAL PREDICATES 1. At least one court has indicated that video tapes with sound should be authenticated in the same manner as used for audio recordings, supra. Roy v. State, 608 S.W.2d 645 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980). The same court held, however, that a silent video should be verified in the same method used for photographs. Huffinan v. State, 746 S.W.2d 212 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). Cf. People V. Heading, 39 Mich. App. 126, 197 N.W.2d 325 (1972) (same foundation as motion picture); Annot., 60 A.L.R.3d Whatever system is used to verify the video tape, the proponent must show that the information on the tape is reliable and accurate. C. CRIME RE-ENACTMENTS AND DEMONSTRATIONS
11 1. The courts tend to be wary of admitting videotapes which are staged. A typical example would be a videotape re enactment of the crime. 2. An argument for admitting this sort of video would be that it assists the jury in understanding the relative position of the parties and the exact layout of the crime scene. In effect, it brings an otherwise sterile jury view of the scene to life. The defense objection is that the vividness and reality of the re enactment might mislead the jury into confusing fact with fiction. 3. THE PREDICATE FOR DEMONSTRATIONS IS: a. The experiment will evidence a tendency, capability or quality of a certain statement of facts to produce a certain result. b. Substantially similar conditions as those existing at the time of the occurrence in question are reproduced. c. The jury will not be misled or confused by the experiment. C. HEARSAY ISSUES 1. Although the issue does not arise often, there is caste law addressing the issue of whether a particular drawing or diagram amounted to hearsay. 2. The following discussion briefly addresses several areas where hearsay may occur in this type of evidence: a. Composite Sketches of Defendant:
12 There is a fairly large amount of case law which indicates that a composite sketch of the defendant is hearsay. see Annot., 43 A.L.R That is, when the victim describes the defendant s features to a police artist or investigator who then converts that verbal description into a visual representation, either or both the victim and the artist have made an out of court statement. Whether that statement amounts to hearsay will depend on the use made of the sketch at trial. Because most jurisdictions have followed the lead of Federal Rule of Evidence 801, which treats a declarant s pretrial identification as nonhearsay, the issue should not pose any serious problems. If Rule 801 is not available, the proponent may try relying upon one of the hearsay exceptions such as excited utterance or present sense impression, depending on the time and circumstances of the identification procedures. VIII. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE A. IN GENERAL 1. Documentary evidence, like any other evidence, must meet the same standards of authentication, identification and relevancy as any other piece of evidence. In addition, FRE 901 (a), requires, that, for authentication, there must be, evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims. IX. Conclusion While the introduction of real and demonstrative evidence is extremely effective, the prosecutor should never take it for granted
13 that the evidence will be admitted or even permitted in the courtroom. Before any attempt is made to analyze the most effective method of using the evidence during trial, counsel should first address the issue of determining whether a legal predicate can be established. The inquiry should then turn to the issue of whether, and to what extent, the evidence is relevant, and then whether there are other evidence hurdles, such as hearsay and best evidence objections, which must be confronted. Once those issues have been analyzed, the advocate can focus on developing the most effective method of using the exhibits at trial.
14 Handling Exhibits HANDLING EXHBITS 1. Have exhibit marked for identification by clerk. 2. Ask witness if he recognizes the exhibit but don t have him explain what it is. 3. Have witness identify any marks (initials, etc.) or other identifying characteristics to show the exhibit is the same one that he has reference to. 4. Have witness explain where exhibit obtained. 5. Have witness explain the exhibit has been in his custody. 6. If exhibit sent off to FBI for tests, have witness point this out, when sent off, when returned, and that he maintained custody of it after its return. 7. Determine whether exhibit is in same (or substantially the same) condition as when he originally took custody of it, or explain any change in condition, such as where marks or samples taken from it during examination and tests by FBI and marks made by FBI. 8. Offer exhibit into evidence subject to a showing of materiality, unless the materiality has already been show or is self-evident. 9. After demonstration of materiality of exhibit, re-offer it for unlimited purposes. 10. Materiality of certain exhibits may be shown by use of expert witnesses (such as FBI lab men) who will connect blood samples, hair, fiber, etc., with the case at trial. Then those items can be re-offered for unlimited purposes. Other items, such as weapons identified by officers and marked by them, also identified by other witnesses as like gun used in crime, need no further showing of materiality. Your honor, the State moves the admissibility into evidence of all exhibits heretofore marked and presented by the state...
15 Automobile Accident Reconstruction PREDICATE QUESTIONS: AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTION 1. State your name please. 2. What is your occupation? 3. How long have you been so employed? 4. Were you so employed on 5. Have you attended any special schools connected with your work? Accident Reconstruction. 6. Will you please name some of the specialized schools? 7. When and where did you attend these schools? 8. How long did you attend? 9. What did the training consist of? 10. Were you tested in any manner to determine your degree of proficiency in the area? 11. Did you successfully complete this course of instruction? 12. Were you issued a certificate, diploma, or other evidence of such completion? 13. Since the completion of your training, have you had occasion to investigate accidents concerning automobiles? 14. Approximately how many times? 15. Have you testified previously in a Court concerning Automobile Accident Reconstruction? 16. Approximately how many times? STATEMENT: At this time, your honor. I would move this court to qualify as an expert witness in the field of Automobile Accident Reconstruction. 17. Did you have an occasion to investigate an accident that occurred on at location? 18. What did you observe when you arrived on the scene? Number of vehicles Location of vehicles Angle of vehicles 19. Did you observe any physical evidence indicating the direction of travel of the automobile(s)? Body parts (strewn or attached) Other physical evidence, such as: torn trees, signposts. or fences. 20. Did you observe any skid marks? Measurement of skid marks Direction of skid marks 21. As a result of your investigation, as you have related through your testimony. Were you able to form an expert opinion as to the: Speed of the vehicles Direction of the vehicles Which vehicle at fault (civil infraction) 22. Thank you, you may inquire.
16 Autopsy Questions Pathologist PATHOLOGIST AUTOPSY QUESTIONS 1. Get photograph of victim 2. Name 3. Address 4. Profession 5. Are you Licensed to practice medicine in the State of? Any other state? 6. Would you relate to the Court and Jury your educational background? 7. Are you a member of any professional organizations? 8. Do you have a specialty? 9. What? 10. Describe if you would, exactly what your specialty is. 11. Are you certified in pathology? 12. Where did you receive your training in pathology? 13. What did it consist of? 14. In what capacity are you presently employed? 15. What are your duties? 16. How many autopsies have you performed? 17. Have you qualified in a Court of Law as an expert in pathology? 18. How many times? Submit Doctor as Qualified 19. Doctor, during the month of do you recall how you were employed? 20. During that month just stated, did you have an occasion to perform one or more autopsies? 21. Do you recall your whereabouts on 22. Did you have an occasion to perform an autopsy or autopsies on on the 23. Doctor, I show you a photograph marked State s Exhibit No. for purposes of identification and ask you if you can identify this picture. GO THROUGH PREDICATE QUESTIONS. 24. And what does this picture depict? (Doctor identifies victim), 25. Doctor, when was the first time you saw this person? 26. Did you perform an autopsy on this particular person on? 27. How long did that autopsy last? 28. Where did it take place? 29. When was the first time you saw this victim? Was it at the autopsy? 30. Based on that particular autopsy. within the bounds of reasonable medical certainty, have you formed an expert opinion concerning the cause of death? 31. What is that opinion?
17 Bank Account Microfilm Records PREDICATION FOR MICROFILM BANK ACCOUNT RECORDS 1. Name 2. Occupation 3. Duties (including that witness is custodian of all account records.) 4. Were any accounts in the name of during the period through? 5. How many account(s)? 6. What kind of account(s)? 7. Exact style of the account(s)? 8. Account Number(s)? 9. Pursuant to subpoena, did you bring with you certain records pertaining to account number? 10. Please identify these records and hand them to me so that the Clerk can mark them. 11. What other records pertaining to this account were you not required to bring? (MARK FOR IDENTIFICATION) 12. Point out which of these papers are originals and which are microfilm facsimiles or copies. Establish: (a) When, where, how and by whom prepared; (b) Whether in regular course of business and (c) Whether in his custody. (If witness saw Defendant sign signature card, ask if he saw Defendant sign and if he sees that person in courtroom). 13. Other than entries in monthly statements, were any other records made of checks deposited to, the accompanying deposit slips, and checks drawn on this account? (Answer yes, each item microfilmed.) Establish: (a) When, where, how (including that entry front and back side each item photographed) and by whom; (b) that done in regular course of business; and (c) that microfilm negatives under his custody. 14. Does microfilm negative form a durable and accurate medium for reproducing facsimile of the original item? 15. (As to each item marked for identification.) Are each of these facsimiles accurate reproductions of the microfilm negatives? (Did you personally check the facsimile against the negative?) 16. And are those microfilm negatives presently in your custody at the bank and available to us in this trial should the court direct that they be produced? 17. What procedures followed by bank to insure that this and its other accounts are accurate? (Move Admissibility of Exhibit).
18 Blood Alcohol Toxicologist PREDICATE FOR TOXICOLOGIST REGARDING BLOOD ALCOHOL TEST I. Name and address 2. What is your occupation or profession? 3. What education and training have you had to qualify you as a toxicologist? 4. Have you had any training and experience with respect to poisons, alcohol and chemical tests for alcoholic concentration in blood? 5. Have you written any articles (lectures, et cetera) on this subject? 6. Are you a member of any societies or organizations dealing with this subject? 7. Have you performed tests on blood samples to determine alcoholic concentration? 8. About how many times? 9. Have you previously testified in courts as a toxicologist? 10. Qualified to make blood alcohol examination? 11. On or about did you receive a specimen of blood from 12. What identification was on the specimen? 13. Describe what you did with the blood. 14. What were your findings with respect to this blood? 15. Is there a recognized correlation between the alcoholic content of the blood and intoxication? 16. From your training and experience, what would be the condition of a person whose blood showed a concentration of 0.33 per cent ethyl alcohol?
19 Blood Groupings Chemist PREDICATE FOR CHEMIST AS TO BLOOD GROUPINGS 1. Please state your name and address. 2. What is your occupation or profession? 3. How long have you been so employed? 4. To what duties have you been assigned with the FBI? 5. How long have you been engaged in making chemical analyses? 6. What training, study and preparation have you had in connection with making chemical analyses? 7. Are you now one of the regular chemical analysts assigned to the FBI lab in Washington. D.C.? 8. Have you previously qualified as an expert chemical analyst in other courts? 9. Would you please name some courts in which you have so qualified? Submit Qualifications as Expert Chemical Analyst 10. State, if you know, if all human blood is identical or can blood be divided scientifically into groups. 11. Do you know these groups? 12. What are they? 13. From your training, experience and study. about which you have previously testified, do you know the processes by which human blood can be grouped? 14. Can you make such determinations? 15. About how many times have you done so? 16. Describe what specifically you do to determine the blood group into which a particular specimen falls now hand you a section of a car floor mat which has been filed for identification as State s Exhibit and ask you to examine it and state whether you have ever seen it before? 18. From whom did you receive it? 19. How? 20. Did you place any marks of identification on it? 21. At same time you received the section of floor mat, did you receive anything else from the police department? 22. What? 23. Did you make any examination of those objects? 24. Following your examinations, what was done with the objects? 25. When you returned them to the police department, were they in same condition as when you received them? Offer Mat in Evidence Exhibit 26. What was purpose of your examination of State s Exhibit? 27. Did you, in your examination, use the methods and tests about which you have previously testified? 28. Please state what you determined or learned from your tests. 29. Then you found human blood group A on the floor mat and found that the specimen submitted to you likewise was human blood, group A? 30. So it is possible both could have come from a common source?
20 Body Fluids Expert Blood Semen PREDICATE QUESTIONS FOR EXPERT IN BODY FLUIDS (BLOOD, SEMEN, ETC.) Initial Identifying Questions 1. Please state your full name. 2. Where do you reside? 3. What is your present occupation? 4. By whom are you employed? 5. How long have you been so employed? 6. Questions Relating to Expertise 1. What is your educational background? (a) Undergraduate (b) Graduate (c) Subsequent specialized education in the field 2. Have you had any other specialized training in your field? (a) On the job training (b) Special research projects 3. Arc you a member of any organizations related to your work? 4. Do you subscribe to any publications related to your field? 5. Have you authored any papers for either private circulation or publication relating to your field? (a) What subjects? (b) Published? (c) If privately circulated, among whom? 6. Is your entire work devoted to your field, or do you have other duties? 7. Have you ever testified as an expert before? (a) In court or before administrative agencies? (b) In what jurisdiction? (c) Approximately how many times? Questions Relating to the Field of Expertise 1. Would you explain to the jury the nature of the work you do? 2. What body fluids do you analyze? (a) Explain blood analysis. or the analysis of the other fluids submitted for examination. (b) Be sure the recitation is in terms that make the explanation understandable to the jury. 3. What is the significance of the information you obtain as a result of this type of analysis? (a) If blood, explain typing. (b) If blood or urine for drugs or alcohol content, explain. (c) If semen for presence of sperm, or for determination of blood type (if a secretor is involved), explain. Questions Relating to the Evidence Submitted and the Examinations Conducted 1. Did you have occasion to examine evidence submitted to you by the (law enforcement agency) in this case? 2. I show you what has been marked for identification as State s Exhibit (a) Do you recognize this exhibit? (b) How are you able to do so? (c) When and where did it first come into your custody? (d) What did you do with it? (Performed tests and examinations)
21 (e) Was it in your care, custody and control until its return to the (law enforcement agency)? (f) Is it in substantially the same condition as when you returned it to the (law enforcement agency)? (g) Offer the exhibit. 4. What tests or examinations did you conduct on this exhibit? 5. What was the purpose of those tests and examinations? 6. Please describe in detail each of the tests and examinations. 7. Did these tests and examinations permit you to arrive at a conclusion? 8. Is your conclusion within the bounds of reasonable scientific probability (or even better, reasonable scientific certainty)? 9. What is your conclusion? Please explain it to the jury. (a) Utilize this explanation to illustrate the significance of the conclusions to the State s case. (b) Also attempt to negate the possible impact of cross-examination by demonstrating the certainty of the findings, or the scientific impossibility of absolute certainty by the nature of the substance in question or the state of the science. Tender the Witness for Cross-examination
22 Breathalyzer DUI PREDICATE QUESTIONS IN BREATHALYZER CASES 1. State your present job and how long you have been on the Highway Patrol? 2. What are your duties, and as part of your duties, do you administer a breathalyzer test? 3. Did you administer any test that required the securing of a sample of the Defendant s breath? 4. How long have you been an authorized operator of a breathalyzer unit? 5. Did you have any special training in the operation of the breathalyzer? Describe that training briefly. 6. Did you receive a Certificate from the State Board of Health which certified you as qualified to operate the breathalyzer? 7. Prior to securing the sample of breath from the Defendant, did you advise the Defendant of his constitutional rights? 8. Did the Defendant voluntarily and of his own free will and accord furnish you a sample of his breath for testing purposes? 9. Were any promises or threats made by you or anyone in your presence to the Defendant prior to obtaining his breath sample? 10. I ask you the following questions which relate to the period of time just prior to securing a sample of the Defendant s breath. (a) Was the machine properly checked out and in good working order at the time of the test? (b) Describe to the Court what steps you took to properly prepare this machine to take the breath sample? (c) Did the defendant have anything in his mouth at the time of the test? (d) Did the defendant have anything to eat or drink within fifteen minutes of time prior to the test being run? (e) Was the entire test conducted in the proper and proscribed manner? 11. Who was present at the time the breathalyzer test was administered to the defendant? 12. Just what kind of test is the Breathalyzer Test? 13. At school, were breath tests correlated to blood tests? 14. In your own words, tell us how the Breathalyzer works? 15. Will anything else besides alcohol cause this reaction? 16. Were you present when the defendant gave a sample of his breath? 17. After the breath was introduced into the machine. (lid you observe a reading on the meter? 18. What was that reading? 19. Have any authoritative bodies endorsed the reliability of the Breathalyzer? 20. What are these bodies? 21. The reading of which you stated that you observed what does this mean in terms of Blood Alcohol? 22. At what alcohol percent does one begin to he under the influence? 23. Is this your opinion or has this statement been made by one or more authoritative bodies? 24. If a person has alcohol in his blood, will his breath contain alcohol? 25. How does the alcohol get in the breath? 26. Is the test designed to show how much a person has had to drink?